Mock Juror Perceptions of Credibility and Culpability in an Autistic Defendant

Abstract

One-hundred-and-sixty jury-eligible participants read a vignette describing a male who was brought to the attention of police for suspicious and aggressive behaviours and displayed atypical behaviours in court. Half of participants were informed that he had autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and were given background information about ASD; the other half received no diagnostic label or information. The provision of a label and information led to higher ratings of the defendant’s honesty and likeability, reduced blameworthiness, and resulted in fewer guilty verdicts, and more lenient sentencing. Thematic analysis revealed that participants in the label condition were more empathetic and attributed his behaviours to his ASD and mitigating factors, while participants in the No label condition perceived the defendant as deceitful, unremorseful, rude and aggressive.

Allely, C. S., & Cooper, P. (2017). Jurors’ and judges’ evaluation of defendants with autism and the impact on sentencing: A systematic Preferred Reporting Items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) review of autism spectrum disorder in the courtroom.
Journal of Law and Medicine, 25(1), 105–123.

Cooper, P., & Allely, C. (2017). You can’t judge a book by its cover: evolving professional responsibilities, liabilities and ‘judgecraft’ when a party has Asperger’s syndrome.
Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 68(1), 35–58.

Shtayermman, O. (2009). An exploratory study of the stigma associated with a diagnosis of Asperger’s syndrome: The mental health impact on the adolescents and young adults diagnosed with a disability with a social nature.
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 19, 298–313.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​1091135090279072​0.